Nobody asked to integrate the feature, they did it based on popularity (which you can see on the add-in site). Not all decisions get passed through the cyclone that is the web users. After all I would expect every product manufacturer to try and make their product more attractive. The key is to be open to feedback which they always appeared to be open to in the past.
Most products I've worked on were a closed clientele except for D-Link Canada. The original support site was created from user feedback (I know, I wrote the first version using ASP (Not.NET)). Customers loved it because it was built based on their needs, not ours.
Backweb is a company I worked for and EVERY SINGLE FEATURE was implemented based on user feedback.
The fact is that Firefox implemented pocket because it was a popular addon used on Firefox (as stated in their response). Prior to that they had their own version of what pocket is and it was removed. So the outcry is only partially justified. As far as I'm concerned the only mistake they made is not properly announcing it prior to release.
Jeez you have no faith in anybody do you. I've never worked for a company that added crap in anything just because. Firefox did this based on the popularity of the product. They replaced their own version of Pocket with this popular adding. No damage done.
I get what your saying but it's a little different here. The complaints here are more of "purist nature". It stems from the mentality that everything has to remain strip down to its minimal regardless of anything. My answer to that is always: "as long as there's a disable option".
I would have a different take if the browser was tailored for the tech users but instead it's tailored for everybody which means include the features that are important so the user doesn't have to figure it out.
... and those that know nothing about it also won't complain either
What they don't know doesn't affect them.
The trend in software development is always towards bloat, cruft and kitchen sink
You're assuming that it's what happened here. Dev time is costly, most companies try to avoid wasting it whenever possible. And please don't put software in the same boat as laptop manufacturers.
what everyone MIGHT need in a package that is too bloated to actually be usable.
You know we are talking about a browser. Mozilla is far from being a burden for even the oldest computer I have in my office (7+ years old). I believe the google bar offered in almost every install package these days to be a bigger burden to most systems.
How many times have you used Notepad/Wordpad instead of Word?
Are you suggesting notepad/wordpad should not be included in the OS as it's bloatware? What if I didn't need notepad? What if I always install another text editor, why do I need notepad now? Is it bloatware of convenience?
Fact is that those who like it won't complain so you only hear those with a negative opinion about it.
In my experience most companies do not implement features for fun. They do it because it's feedback they received from a large number of users. The fact that it can be disabled pretty much closes the case in my opinion but I guess some purist fanatics will complain.
You know just as much as me that not all mechanical failures can be anticipated which is why road failures occur. Electronics fail too and may provide invalid data to the computer which could steer the car off the road. It's not the robots fault, it's not the occupants fault but it is your vehicle's fault hence the liability.
Corporation don't answer to customers in regards to how they spend their profits. As a customer you have the option to switch to another insurance company. If enough people do it they won't be splurging on such things.
But putting that aside I get a glimpse of your mentality and it is that companies should not be able to spend on "non essentials". Last I checked we live in a capitalist system. Racing to the top through competition is part of the key ingredients that make capitalism a successful system. If successful people aren't allowed to celebrate their success then I guess the system is all going down the toilet then. I guess we can all go back to the days where our sole daily objective was to figure out a way to feed our families.
As long as the car isn't wired to any outside system while in driving mode I see limited issues. After all, Trojans are only valuable if they can be accessed.
Refinements. Not every version, every year can be stunning. After all a lot of what can be done with current mobile technology has already been done.
What will revive mobile devices is external enhancements like the watch, glasses... Not to suggest that the watch is revolutionary (although some believe so).
Although I know some companies are still going to lack common sense, most have learned valuable lessons throughout the years. To date the existing self driving car features aren't connected to the grid. I believe that's going to remain. Obtaining updates wireless (at the shop) in my opinion is probably the biggest risk. Putting a hard switch or forcing updates to be done via hard wire are probably the best options.
I think your underestimating the value of technological feature. Once well established I expect them to be very popular.
I have 2.5 hours of daily driving in traffic. I could easily get ahead of work, entertain myself or even get some shut eye during that time. Most women I know love the idea. For starters they don't usually like driving. They usually have their husbands drive during family trips (Sorry, I know I'm generalizing but the stats are here to prove it).
Even if I love driving, there are times where it's dangerous (I'm tired, drunk...) or I simply don't feel like it.
I don't mean to be rude but your argument sounds like what the MS CEO said about the iPhone before it's success.
It all comes down to having the right sensors and the right algorithm to handle the situations. The fact is that the computer can process far more road condition data than a human being. I too drive/drove in rough conditions (used to live far north in Canada). Based on my experience I'd bet the a well designed self driving car would do much better than most drivers.
Visibility (possibly limited), steering, 2 pedals, g-force are the only elements most drivers use to drive their vehicle. For most of us this feedback is often responded to late resulting in slight over compensation.
The computer has unlimited visibility and 4 wheel traction control not limited by slip diffs and other slow response technologies. Instead all 4 wheels are controlled independent (I'm assuming these cars will all be electric by then). The computer is much quicker at responding to change in road conditions and is able to adapt much quicker.
More than that... if we have self driving cars, why would I pay for insurance at all?
The question is more why not? Your car is just as much a liability as any other on the road. The major difference is that the "self driving" part of your car is less likely to be at fault in an accident (I'm assuming here). So that means you should get a much lower premium. Is that how it's going to be initially? Probably not. It will only change as statistics are collected by insurance companies. After all, that's how insurance works.
Liability covers more than just who is driving. If you fail to properly maintain your vehicle, that's not the self driving feature's fault hence the liability.
Insurance is a collective cushion. We all pay so that it doesn't ruin our lives should something happen. Those more prone to accidents or with bad records pay more to compensate.
You don't need to have life insurance because your death is really only your problem but a car collision is a problem for everybody involved.
We are a long way from having all cars self driving. For that reason alone there's no reason to be alarmed about immediate change. Like any industry, when one disappears resources are shifted towards another industry. A few industries that noticed major increase in output per man are: Agriculture, mining, wood processing plants and wood cutting. There are many others, some which even disappeared from existence (phone switchboard operators, milk man:)... )
What I would expect to see as most vehicles become self driving is lowered cost of insurance.
Obviously the by-product of self driving cars is a requirement to have road worthy vehicles. I could see this becoming mandatory resulting in an increased demand for mechanics.
Industries that will suffer are collision repair shops and insurance companies.
Many elected officials end up building their own business because nobody will hire them for their skillset. The fact is that many take a pay drop by choosing to go into government here in Canada. Our justice system is also very different which prevents people in power from getting away from the law. I'm not suggesting we are worlds apart but I believe there is less corruption caused by corporate greed.
In the USA many say a 3rd political party may never happen yet in Canada the smallest party is looking at possibly winning the next federal election.
I won't be able to agree with you and that's ok, we are both entitled to our own opinion based since we have obviously had different experiences in our lives.
I live in Canada so things are possibly different. Fact is that no matter who you are, you answer to someone and what some may consider acceptable, others will consider appalling. It's often a matter of perspective right or wrong.
I tend to have faith in people. I believe in enabling people to do their best. If they fail they need to be accountable and willing to explain why they believe they failed followed by what they would do different next time.
All I was saying is the public likes the product. Proof is it's popularity and how widely available it is. I could probably name hundreds of products that have been loved by/. users that weren't perfect under the hood. I'd be more concerned if the product didn't improve but based on what I've seen it has some promise.
My brother lives in Quebec and just finished building. I don't recall the specifics but going outside to inside there was a vapor barrier, 1" foam, 2" foam inside followed by a clear plastic. I most probably have the order wrong and possibly even the exact stuff used but he told me this was a requirement for him to be accepted to build. Possibly it's a local requirement so I'm not 100% sure.
Having done business with Quebec and seen the way they bargain I believe corners are often cut. There was actually a government wide investigation done by a 3rd party (paid by said government but independent) and lots of corruption came to the surface.
Slashdot Mirror
Nobody asked to integrate the feature, they did it based on popularity (which you can see on the add-in site). Not all decisions get passed through the cyclone that is the web users. After all I would expect every product manufacturer to try and make their product more attractive. The key is to be open to feedback which they always appeared to be open to in the past.
Is there an actual factual piece of information available to back that. I looked and didn't find one.
Most products I've worked on were a closed clientele except for D-Link Canada. The original support site was created from user feedback (I know, I wrote the first version using ASP (Not .NET)). Customers loved it because it was built based on their needs, not ours.
Backweb is a company I worked for and EVERY SINGLE FEATURE was implemented based on user feedback.
The fact is that Firefox implemented pocket because it was a popular addon used on Firefox (as stated in their response). Prior to that they had their own version of what pocket is and it was removed. So the outcry is only partially justified. As far as I'm concerned the only mistake they made is not properly announcing it prior to release.
Jeez you have no faith in anybody do you. I've never worked for a company that added crap in anything just because. Firefox did this based on the popularity of the product. They replaced their own version of Pocket with this popular adding. No damage done.
:)
I get what your saying but it's a little different here. The complaints here are more of "purist nature". It stems from the mentality that everything has to remain strip down to its minimal regardless of anything. My answer to that is always: "as long as there's a disable option".
I would have a different take if the browser was tailored for the tech users but instead it's tailored for everybody which means include the features that are important so the user doesn't have to figure it out.
... and those that know nothing about it also won't complain either
What they don't know doesn't affect them.
The trend in software development is always towards bloat, cruft and kitchen sink
You're assuming that it's what happened here. Dev time is costly, most companies try to avoid wasting it whenever possible. And please don't put software in the same boat as laptop manufacturers.
what everyone MIGHT need in a package that is too bloated to actually be usable.
You know we are talking about a browser. Mozilla is far from being a burden for even the oldest computer I have in my office (7+ years old). I believe the google bar offered in almost every install package these days to be a bigger burden to most systems.
How many times have you used Notepad/Wordpad instead of Word?
Are you suggesting notepad/wordpad should not be included in the OS as it's bloatware? What if I didn't need notepad? What if I always install another text editor, why do I need notepad now? Is it bloatware of convenience?
Lol. They'll work themselves out of their own 1% of the market :)
Fact is that those who like it won't complain so you only hear those with a negative opinion about it.
In my experience most companies do not implement features for fun. They do it because it's feedback they received from a large number of users. The fact that it can be disabled pretty much closes the case in my opinion but I guess some purist fanatics will complain.
You know just as much as me that not all mechanical failures can be anticipated which is why road failures occur. Electronics fail too and may provide invalid data to the computer which could steer the car off the road. It's not the robots fault, it's not the occupants fault but it is your vehicle's fault hence the liability.
Corporation don't answer to customers in regards to how they spend their profits. As a customer you have the option to switch to another insurance company. If enough people do it they won't be splurging on such things.
But putting that aside I get a glimpse of your mentality and it is that companies should not be able to spend on "non essentials". Last I checked we live in a capitalist system. Racing to the top through competition is part of the key ingredients that make capitalism a successful system. If successful people aren't allowed to celebrate their success then I guess the system is all going down the toilet then. I guess we can all go back to the days where our sole daily objective was to figure out a way to feed our families.
Doesn't the manufacturer need to be involved?
As long as the car isn't wired to any outside system while in driving mode I see limited issues. After all, Trojans are only valuable if they can be accessed.
It's a good point. Maybe the changes are too incremental so nothing appears stunning. LOL!!
Lets be honest. Other than new H/W support and GUI improvements what really changed in client OS tech in the last 10 years? I'd say very little.
Refinements. Not every version, every year can be stunning. After all a lot of what can be done with current mobile technology has already been done.
What will revive mobile devices is external enhancements like the watch, glasses... Not to suggest that the watch is revolutionary (although some believe so).
Although I know some companies are still going to lack common sense, most have learned valuable lessons throughout the years. To date the existing self driving car features aren't connected to the grid. I believe that's going to remain. Obtaining updates wireless (at the shop) in my opinion is probably the biggest risk. Putting a hard switch or forcing updates to be done via hard wire are probably the best options.
I think your underestimating the value of technological feature. Once well established I expect them to be very popular.
I have 2.5 hours of daily driving in traffic. I could easily get ahead of work, entertain myself or even get some shut eye during that time. Most women I know love the idea. For starters they don't usually like driving. They usually have their husbands drive during family trips (Sorry, I know I'm generalizing but the stats are here to prove it).
Even if I love driving, there are times where it's dangerous (I'm tired, drunk...) or I simply don't feel like it.
I don't mean to be rude but your argument sounds like what the MS CEO said about the iPhone before it's success.
It all comes down to having the right sensors and the right algorithm to handle the situations. The fact is that the computer can process far more road condition data than a human being. I too drive/drove in rough conditions (used to live far north in Canada). Based on my experience I'd bet the a well designed self driving car would do much better than most drivers.
Visibility (possibly limited), steering, 2 pedals, g-force are the only elements most drivers use to drive their vehicle. For most of us this feedback is often responded to late resulting in slight over compensation.
The computer has unlimited visibility and 4 wheel traction control not limited by slip diffs and other slow response technologies. Instead all 4 wheels are controlled independent (I'm assuming these cars will all be electric by then). The computer is much quicker at responding to change in road conditions and is able to adapt much quicker.
More than that ... if we have self driving cars, why would I pay for insurance at all?
The question is more why not? Your car is just as much a liability as any other on the road. The major difference is that the "self driving" part of your car is less likely to be at fault in an accident (I'm assuming here). So that means you should get a much lower premium. Is that how it's going to be initially? Probably not. It will only change as statistics are collected by insurance companies. After all, that's how insurance works.
Liability covers more than just who is driving. If you fail to properly maintain your vehicle, that's not the self driving feature's fault hence the liability.
Insurance is a collective cushion. We all pay so that it doesn't ruin our lives should something happen. Those more prone to accidents or with bad records pay more to compensate.
You don't need to have life insurance because your death is really only your problem but a car collision is a problem for everybody involved.
We are a long way from having all cars self driving. For that reason alone there's no reason to be alarmed about immediate change. Like any industry, when one disappears resources are shifted towards another industry. A few industries that noticed major increase in output per man are: Agriculture, mining, wood processing plants and wood cutting. There are many others, some which even disappeared from existence (phone switchboard operators, milk man :) ... )
What I would expect to see as most vehicles become self driving is lowered cost of insurance.
Obviously the by-product of self driving cars is a requirement to have road worthy vehicles. I could see this becoming mandatory resulting in an increased demand for mechanics.
Industries that will suffer are collision repair shops and insurance companies.
Many elected officials end up building their own business because nobody will hire them for their skillset. The fact is that many take a pay drop by choosing to go into government here in Canada. Our justice system is also very different which prevents people in power from getting away from the law. I'm not suggesting we are worlds apart but I believe there is less corruption caused by corporate greed.
In the USA many say a 3rd political party may never happen yet in Canada the smallest party is looking at possibly winning the next federal election.
I won't be able to agree with you and that's ok, we are both entitled to our own opinion based since we have obviously had different experiences in our lives.
I live in Canada so things are possibly different. Fact is that no matter who you are, you answer to someone and what some may consider acceptable, others will consider appalling. It's often a matter of perspective right or wrong.
I tend to have faith in people. I believe in enabling people to do their best. If they fail they need to be accountable and willing to explain why they believe they failed followed by what they would do different next time.
A pellet stove can be used anywhere and the supply of material is readily available on demand through many small and large retailers.
All I was saying is the public likes the product. Proof is it's popularity and how widely available it is. I could probably name hundreds of products that have been loved by /. users that weren't perfect under the hood. I'd be more concerned if the product didn't improve but based on what I've seen it has some promise.
My brother lives in Quebec and just finished building. I don't recall the specifics but going outside to inside there was a vapor barrier, 1" foam, 2" foam inside followed by a clear plastic. I most probably have the order wrong and possibly even the exact stuff used but he told me this was a requirement for him to be accepted to build. Possibly it's a local requirement so I'm not 100% sure.
Having done business with Quebec and seen the way they bargain I believe corners are often cut. There was actually a government wide investigation done by a 3rd party (paid by said government but independent) and lots of corruption came to the surface.
Absolutely.
When I said "conspiracy theories" I wanted to avoid getting into the intellectual theft argument.